Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror
Robin Blankenship
POL201: American National Government (GSI1325J)
Instructor
Amy Lyons
January 22, 2013

In our Nation’s history, we have to consider the legality of the Government’s concerning our civil liberties. The habeas Corpus Act and the War on Terror are full of facts and issues that have brought me to address areas that cover the historical evolution, the suspension of habeas corpus, the importance of this act and the evaluation from different perspectives such as the media and the U.S. Supreme Court. Habeas Corpus is a most extraordinary court order of the judges’ power over a human being. “The Habeas Corpus Act passed by Parliament in 1679 guaranteed this right in law, although its origins go back much further, probably to Anglo-Saxon times. It is Latin for "you may have the body” It is a writ which requires a person detained by the authorities be brought before a court of law so that the legality of the detention may be examined.”(BBC NEWS) Habeas Corpus stemmed from the legal traditions of English law, and the Framers of the United States acknowledged the importance of the law. The United States followed and studied this tradition focusing mainly on the effects of the American Civil War, adopting it as “The Privilege of the writ of Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended unless when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”(Revised 9/11) Habeas Corpus is in direct protection of our civil liberties and is the freedom from arbitrary governmental influenced in our lives. Habeas Corpus is a link to many other civil liberties that protect us from government power. Our civil liberties is what every American should know and what have of us don’t. As we all know Americans are famous for their love of freedom (civil liberties). Constitutional protection covers many areas of our lives such as Racial profiling, Equal Pay Act and the Fair

Housing Act. The Fair Housing Act protects us from being discriminated from rent, selling or buying a home because of race, religion or any disability one may have. As extraordinary as Habeas Corpus has been, it has been suspended in the history of the United States, and has affected its present status. The Habeas Corpus suspension clause states as “The Privilege of the writ of Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended unless when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”(Revised 9/11) This suspension clause has been what I would call a great debate. I have learned that all Articles of our Constitution have seemed to be an argument at some time or another. Some believes that it should stand as is and other feels it depends on the circumstances. In the suspension of Habeas Corpus that is exactly what the case is, controversy some argued that the prisoners situation is not with in the statute or detained contrary to law, therefore the Court must consider the circumstance and, whether the authority committing is a legal authority. Fore me I believe the suspension should stand because why would you detain someone at such extent for mutiny or if they were putting others at risk. There are numerous cases when these questions have been connected with the suspension of Habeas Corpus.
In Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2, the Chambers Case, “Chambers was brought by a habeas corpus out of the Fleet, and returned, that he was "committed to the Fleet by virtue of a decree

in the Star Chamber, by reason of certain words he used at the council table, viz. that the merchants of England were screwed up here in England more than in Turkey." And for these and other words of defamation of the Government, he was censured to be committed to the Fleet, and to be there imprisoned until he made his submission at the council table, and to pay a fine of two thousand pounds.”(Founder’s Constitution) This is an example of a case when rebellion plays a role in the Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause.
“On Oct. 17, 2006, President Bush signed a law suspending the right of habeas corpus to persons "determined by the United States" to be an "enemy combatant" in the Global War on Terror. President Bush's action drew severe criticism, mainly for the law's failure to specifically designate who in the United States will determine who is and who is not an "enemy combatant." (Lincoln 2013) Habeas Corpus is very important concerning our situation during the war on terror. In the early days it was war between one country and another. Now the U.S. is faced with individuals, groups and organizations that are aimed to attack specific government agencies as well as direct cities, communities or major functions. It is far more difficult to keep up with so many terrorist, at least with a country you know where the attack is coming from. Habeas Corpus

allows the government to judge the right to detain or not to. It truly works in our favor because it makes us be able to judge each individual situation as it arises, and the suspension allows us to excuse the ones that are unlawfully accused due to cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it. In respect to persons characterized by enemy soldiers or illegal participants, Habeas Corpus allows the government to determine any person, including American citizens who are suspected of being terrorist or any organization that is a treat to our country. When President Bush was in office he claimed the power of Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. During the period of Al Qaeda (Osama bin Laden) exercised the right of Habeas corpus.
The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the right of Habeas Corpus concerning enemy combatants or illegal combatants centers on the federal courts review, however the determination is decided by the Supreme Court. The principle of habeas corpus ensures that a prisoner can be released from unlawful rulings that which our Court shall then and there consider and order in their behalf. (Legal-dictionary 2013) “On June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court ruled against the U.S. government in cases brought by foreign nationals challenging their detention at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba military facility.[1] A

five-justice majority in Boumediene v. Bush held that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA)[2] violated the U.S. constitutional right of the detainees to meaningful habeas corpus review by federal civilian judges.”( American Society 2008) According to the Court, the prisoners there have a constitutional right to go to federal court to challenge their continued detention. The majority including Anthony M. Kennedy said the truncated review procedure provided by a previous law, the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, “falls short of being a constitutionally adequate substitute” because it failed to offer “the fundamental procedural protections of habeas corpus.” There have been several incident when Habeas Corpus was used fairly. In Hamdi v. Rumsfied a case that stemmed from the Sept. 11, 2011 al Qaeda terrorist attack on commercial airlines in the united stated were about 3,000 people were killed. The U.S. government accused Hamdi of allegedly taking the firearms with the Taliban during the conflict he was a citizen of the U.S. It was ruled that because he was a U.S. citizen he had a right to due process ( ). “Following the court's decision, on October 9, 2004, the US government released Hamdi without charge and deported him to Saudi Arabia, where his family lived and he had grown up, on the condition that he renounce his US citizenship and commit to travel prohibitions and other conditions.”(Hamdi v. Rumsfied 2004)

There are many perspectives on this topic concerning the Habeas Corpus Act. The Presidency's role in war, national security, and policy both foreign and domestic, in the Civil War, ordered the detention of enemy combatants. Most studies of the Presidency focus on a single chief executive or depict the funds from the treasury, and suspended the writ of habeas corpus. Other branches of government, such as the executive branch; headed by the president, the judicial branch, headed by the Supreme Court which holds trials and decides cases under the Habeas Corpus Act. Observers in both the academic and popular media have their separate opinions and petitions on the habeas corpus act. “ Boumediene, as the mediaand talking-heads have overlooked, struck down the administration's legislative overruling of the court's prior habeasdecisions in Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004), and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006). Boumediene -- in spite of the hype -- simply holds that the court's decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), giving so-called "enemy combatants" a chance to factually contest the basis of their detention, applies to aliens imprisoned by the U.S. at our Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.” (Donald 2008). In conclusion I learned The Habeas Corpus is a privilege the protests citizens to have the right to a trial from being detained unjustly. War on terror the term that is used signify a global

military, political, lawful, and conceptual struggle, targeting both organizations designated as terrorist and regimes accused of supporting them. The suspension I been proven to protect prisoners of both civil and military detainers. It is significant that is evaluated and addressed from all angles.

Reference
BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | A brief history of habeas corpus http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4329839.stm 9/11 Revisited - Striking a balance between civil liberties and ... http://users.humboldt.edu/ogayle/hist110/BalancingAct.html The Founders' Constitution Volume 3, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2, Document 1 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_9_2s1.html The University of Chicago Press
President Lincoln suspends the writ of habeas corpus during the ... http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/president-lincoln-suspends-the-writ-of-habeas-c... ©2013 About.com

Habeas Corpus - Legal Dictionary - The Free Dictionary http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/habeas+corpus Copyright © 2013

YASER ESAM HAMDI v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
June 28, 2004

American Society of Internal Law
June 20, 2008 Volume 12, Issue 13

Commentary: Making 'habeas' mean something to our nation
Rehkopf, Donald G, Jr. Daily Record [Rochester, NY] 19 June 2008.